non-4e D&D Players . . .

[StreamOfTheSky]

Nope. It's still 4E so I'm still not interested. And really, I'm still pissed at WotC for the whole "no pdfs of older editions" thing. Last I checked, those were still not being sold...

Wouldn't want to split the market make it any easier for those darn pirates to make illegal copies of books that have been file shared for several years already, don'tcha know?

 

[Khairn]

. . . will the new Essentials products get you to try (or retry) 4e?

Nope. After playing and GMing 4E, I can honestly say that the system is "ok" but doesn't attract me much, so a re-packaging of the same attracts me even less.

With that said, a new, creative and exciting setting designed with 4E in mind from the ground up, would probably get me to give 4E another try. But trying to attract me to the game through yet another re-tread world simply isn't going to happen.

 

[WarlockLord]

There is nothing in essentials (so far) that solves any of my problems with 4e, save for class similarity. Nothing, IMO, offers any real advantage over my beloved 3.5.

 

[sjmiller]

I seriously doubt I will be buying the Essentials material. My primary reason is I do not really know what it brings to the table. It does baffle me a bit, and maybe someone can help me out here. What makes them Essential? Why should I use the Essentials material instead of just buying the PH, DMG, and MM?

 

[lutecius]

it could be a case of too little too late for me but it's really a little too early to say.

I like the changes so far. they do seem to reverse things I didn't like in 4e (no more martial dailies, the powers i've seen seem to make more sense fluff-wise... I have yet to see how the new marks interact and how multiclassing works, though)

but it will probably take more than just fixing a few mistakes (afaic) for me to switch to 4e. it also needs to fix problems I had with 3e. where's my armor-as-damage-reduction? my truly spontaneous caster? (I know the former has no chance of happening but i'm looking at the warlock for the latter)

 

[LurkMonkey]

At this time, I am too heavily invested in Pathfinder to branch out into other game systems. I think if Essentials had been the initial roll out of 4e, that might have made me more interested, but might-have-beens are rarely fruitful for speculation. What few dollars I can spare these days go to Paizo.

 

[Jor-El]

I occasionally play in a 4E game, but mainly play Pathfinder, but I doubt I'll invest any money in Essentials. I'll stick with what our 4E group has already. I think Essentials sounds like something I would have liked better than the initial core books, but overall 4E doesn't suit my primary tastes in gaming, and the Essentials changes aren't really going to fix that.

It does sound like a nice revamp of the system though.

 

[MoxieFu]

No. Personally I'm hoping for a rules-lite version of Pathfinder. So far the closest I've come to something I like is a heavily house-ruled version of Castles & Crusades.

Maybe Goodman Games RPG will give me my D&D buzz, but I'll just have to wait and see for now.

WotC has fired me as a customer unless 5e comes out and is amazingly close to what I want in a game.

 

[Dark Mistress]

If someone I know buys it and then runs it, I would try it. I think from what I have heard I would like it more than I liked 4e. But I am not interested enough to buy the stuff myself.

 

[TarionzCousin]

If someone I know buys it and then runs it, I would try it. I think from what I have heard I would like it more than I liked 4e. But I am not interested enough to buy the stuff myself.

With a username like "Dark Mistress" my guess is you could easily manipulate convince someone to buy it and run it for you.